Second Pres Debate: Who Won?

[MattusMaximus]

Okay, so who do you think won and why?

Proceed...

[MattusMaximus]

I think corplinx won with his drinking game, btw

[Jontg]

Well, the last question was pretty disappointing--or more accurately, neither candidate's answering it. On the bright side, McCain made a fool of himself in the process--rather than using issues to dodge like Obama did, he just fell back on the war hero line.

[joobz]

I think it was in McCain's favor.
He had better control of himself and the debate.

[corplinx]

My name is T. Boone Pickens. And I am ticked off that nobody mentioned fricken compressed natural gas. I mean what the heck man, I've bought like billions in ads so far.

[Puppycow]

Well, I'm at work now so I haven't been able to see it yet, but judging from the live blog at the NY times, Obama won.

Quote:

Tough Talk | 10:25 p.m. Here, Mr. Obama has a star turn — on foreign policy, Mr. McCain’s supposed turf. Mr. Obama is more forceful than usual, and makes the hunt for Osama bin Laden his singular focus.

“We will kill bin Laden, we will crush al Qaeda,” he declares. “That has to be our biggest national priority.”

By contrast, Mr. McCain seems a bit rambling. He quotes his favorite president, Teddy Roosevelt, as preferring to walk softly but carry a big stick and says that Mr. Obama “likes to talk loudly,” by announcing, for example, “that he wants to attack Pakistan.”

Mr. Obama talks Mr. Brokaw into allowing him to respond. Mr. Brokaw shrugs, “I’m just the hired help here.”

Mr. Obama says that nobody is talking about invading Pakistan. If Pakistan is unable or unwilling to hunt down bin laden, we should do it, he says.

See, that's what I want deep down. Bin Laden's head on a spear. (metaphorically speaking)
It reassures those of us who were worried that Obama might be too much of a peacenik.

Quote:

No Dustups | 10:15 p.m. More than an hour into the debate, no big gaffes, no knock-out punches. Both candidates have made digs at each other, but nothing we haven’t heard before and nothing that qualifies as “taking the gloves off.”

Mr. McCain is more aggressively courting the audience and the ref. Both candidates, who’ve been ignoring the time limits, demand follow-ups.

[Meadmaker]

I only watched the first 40 minutes, and I don't think there was a clear "winner" during that period.

Probably, I think Obama won, at 4:00 Eastern time, at the closing bell of the New York Stock Exchange. So many of the questions were of the form, "With the economy down the tubes, what would you do?" McCain could spin all he wanted, but that's a rough way to start the evening.

[Alferd_Packer]

If I had a shot of Wild Turkey every time McCain mentioned General Prateous, I'd be on the floor right now.

[Oliver]

Well, to answer the OP's question ... The President won.

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

Slightly in favor of McCain, but not enough to matter.

I thought McCain looked and sounded much better than the last debate, and definitely seemed more comfortable with the format than Obama. I also thought he worked his talking points in a lot more naturally here than last time.

Given their positions in the polls, though, I think Obama did well enough. In the end, it was a good debate, but a forgettable one.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Draw. No one got knocked out and at this point, I don't think anyone gained any converts to their side.

I've voting for Obama but if I had to weigh the candidate's debating skills and performance, they are pretty much even.

Then again, Bush and Kerry were pretty much even in the debates. So that tells you something about winning a debate.

[corplinx]

Overall I think the candidates fell back on my Drinking Game talking points. McCain started out off of them but picked it up later in the game with unconditional talks drinks.

The candidates went out of their way to portray themselves as clones yet again.

Now they are both for:
nuclear power
cowboy diplomacy
attacking iran

The differences seem to be:
Healthcare, neither of which I think congress will pass as-is
Invading Darfur

Curiously, Obama seems to be trying to position himself as the real hawk of the two, unafraid to unapologetically launch operations into Pakistan or to go into Darfur.

Beam me up Mr. Speaker.

[Oliver]

They're pretty much even??? Everyone heard what McWho? said about Obama
"invading" Pakistan. In that moment during the Debate, McWho? kicked himself
in front of millions of people.

Also, "Bomb bomb bomb" Iran was a major blowback for the guys point with
the "big stick". [And I'm not sure if that was a sexual reference]

[Wangler]

I agree with a TV commentator that the questions covered too narrow a range of subjects, and both candidates basically just repeated their stump speech boilerplate.

A pretty boring debate, with both candidates awash in mediocrity.

I don't know who won, but the American voter wanting to know if there was anything more about the two major party candidates besides soundbites was certainly the loser.

[aerosolben]

Surprised the mood here is in McCain's favor. He showed improvements, but my reading of CNN's on-screen indicators leads me to think Obama came out better.

One big thing I noticed is the approval drops whenever McCain criticized Obama directly - this does not bode well for his end game campaign strategy.

[chipmunk stew]

This will put Obama's RCP average at or above 50% by Friday.

McCain delivered no good punches.

[MattusMaximus]

I think that they came out basically even in this debate. It was apparent that McCain was more comfortable with this format.

That being said, "even" is a big loss for McCain; Obama basically showed, again, that he can be presidential and hang with the big dogs. With McCain so far behind in the polls, what he needed tonight to make any real difference in slowing Obama's momentum was to have a major game-changer.

He didn't have that.

No game-changer at this stage = McCain is finished.***

At least, that's my read of things. And the Republican strategist on ABC News agreed that McCain did nothing tonight to blunt Obama's surge in the polls, so he's in trouble - big trouble.

***Caveat: I do think McCain is done, but that's no reason for the Democrats to get overconfident and lazy. Obama's campaign is smart, and they're going all-out from here until Election Day. They want to ensure that it's not just "squeaking out a win", they want a major win with an obvious margin of victory.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Oliver

They're pretty much even??? Everyone heard what McWho? said about Obama
"invading" Pakistan. In that moment during the Debate, McWho? kicked himself
in front of millions of people.

Also, "Bomb bomb bomb" Iran was a major blowback for the guys point with
the "big stick". [And I'm not sure if that was a sexual reference]

As an Obama supporter, I agree with you that McCain screwed up on these points, especially how he ham-fistedly addressed the "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" question. His answer was just stupid.

However, my previous analysis was my attempt to look at the debate as objectively as possible without my partisan lenses.

[David Wong]

CNN's insta-poll - who won?

Obama: 54

McCain: 30

[MattusMaximus]

Meh. I don't put much stock in these insta-polls (got a link on that CNN poll, btw?). I'll wait until more detailed analyses come out. I'm guessing this debate, like the last two, won't really have much effect at all in the prediction markets.

[Tricky]

They were both terrible. At least a dozen times I wanted to shout to both of them, "Answer the damn question!"

About their talking points (which had nothing to do with the questions), Obama had a slight advantage.

As I predicted, neither one of them reprised their attack ads.

McCain looked old. Real old. Obama looked resolute and fit. Shallow observation, yes, but we know how deep the American electorate is.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why does McCain still insist on characterizing Obama's answer to crossing into Pakistan to pursue OBL or Al Qaeda as "invading" or "attacking" Pakistan? And why does he say it is telling the enemy what you plan to do? (Oh yeah--when he answers the same question, doesn't he do the same thing?)

It seems nonsensical.

The only valid point is not a question of a difference of policy (that is, the information the questioner wanted) but his criticism about responsible speech. If that's true, Obama's calling attention to McCain wanting to extinct North Korea and singing "Bomb bomb Iran" definitely wins that debate.

Otherwise. . . someone should coach Obama not to say "and" so much (like as filler while forming his next sentence). Once I started hearing it, it was very distracting.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Oh yeah--I mentioned this elsewhere: I really miss the way Bill Clinton would answer a yes/no question. He'd say, "Yes [or no] and let me tell you why" in one breath.

No one could take the question and answer out of context without it being obvious that they were doing so, yet it had the satisfaction of feeling like the guy could actually give a straight answer.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Tricky

They were both terrible. At least a dozen times I wanted to shout to both of them, "Answer the damn question!"

I also noticed this. I think it's one reason why modern debates don't really affect things all that much - the politicians have figured out how to work the system, so to speak.

The only way that I can really see a debate making a big difference is with major gaffes or stupendous put-downs (Reagan's "There you go again!" comes to mind)

Quote:

About their talking points (which had nothing to do with the questions), Obama had a slight advantage.

Agreed. But then I'm a fan of his talking points.

Quote:

As I predicted, neither one of them reprised their attack ads.

A smart move by both men. The fact that McCain "didn't go there" tonight shows me that perhaps he's a bit concerned about his recent ultra-negative turn. I think he's worried that it could be backfiring on him.

Quote:

McCain looked old. Real old. Obama looked resolute and fit. Shallow observation, yes, but we know how deep the American electorate is.

McCain always looks old standing next to Obama. He's nearly 30 years Obama's senior!

[corplinx]

I think the problem is, Obama is for all the things McCain for. McCain doesn't have an issue to hammer him with right now. Drilling? Fine. Nuclear? Fine. Kick foreign countries' butts? Fine.

The candidates used the phrase "fundamental differences" the entire debate and showed very few.

If you have your choice between basically similar candidates, you will pick the one less attached to Bush is my guess. Obama is basically trying to lock up the independent vote through these debates.

[not_so_new]

I am an Obama supporter, I can't get over my own bias 100% and I freely admit that. I think Obama was better but again, I am biased.

The funny thing is I DO think McCain was better this time BUT McCain sees these the town hall debate formats as his bread and butter but I think it completely hurts him. I feel he would have been much better at the other debate if he wasn't so condescending. I think the only reason he was better this time is because he wasn't displaying complete contempt for Obama. It didn't have anything to do with the style of the debate.

I know, he is an older guy and he lived through a lot in Vietnam and that effects his mobility. That said, he looks stuff (because he is) and I think that effects his "likability" while he is up and walking around.

My girlfriend / parter said that when he says "my friends" with his body language it almost seems like an attack, almost too forceful. I think this is a really bad format for McCain.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Wangler

with both candidates awash in mediocrity.

I don't know who won, but the American voter wanting to know if there was anything more about the two major party candidates besides soundbites was certainly the loser.

Which is why I went to play golf, and get hammered afterwards, rather than watch that tripe.

Life -- it isn't for watching horsecrap dry under the heat of TV cameras and stage lights.

DR

[R.Mackey]

I'd go as far as to call this debate "boring."

No new positions, possibly excepting McCain hocking a buy-out of bad mortgages. (From a Republican? Huh?) No scintillating new insights. Not even any sharp attacks. Just more of the same, and a slow slide into negativity.

Therefore, Obama won. McCain has to change the momentum of this contest. I don't think he even tried. Does he have something up his sleeve, or has he given up?

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Tricky

McCain looked old. Real old. Obama looked resolute and fit. Shallow observation, yes, but we know how deep the American electorate is.

Nice bit of age discrimination there, old man.

Try the Profiles in Courage test on both candidates.

Which one has a record of voting against his, or not with his, party?

Think about it.

Of course, none of that explains the hot librarian appeal from the Frozen Tundra, other than standard Britney infested America pop media. Then again, who the hell do you think is putting on this show?

The American media. It's done for their ratings, not for you, dear fellow voter. They are trying to entertain you and sell soap. Looks like a few more data points proving PT Barnum right.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

I also noticed this. I think it's one reason why modern debates don't really affect things all that much - the politicians have figured out how to work the system, so to speak.

The only way that I can really see a debate making a big difference is with major gaffes or stupendous put-downs (Reagan's "There you go again!" comes to mind)

Well, the two parties are "the system" so it's no surprise that it works to protect the candidates from those nasty voters actually getting their questions answered.

It's like they're both (all--counting the VPs) trying so hard to be everything to everyone that they're afraid of actually answering questions that might make them something to someone!

[Puppycow]

Halperin's grades

Quote:

McCain spent much of the evening trying to define Obama on his terms, but never broke all the way through.

First 30 minutes focused on the economic crisis. Other issues included foreign policy, health care, energy and more.

Mark Halperin’s grades:

Obama: B+
McCain: B

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

Therefore, Obama won. McCain has to change the momentum of this contest. I don't think he even tried. Does he have something up his sleeve, or has he given up?

Since the GOP has already thrown him under the bus, why should he care? I say he bangs Eskimo Nell, to attract the middle of the road democrat vote, pulling the WJ Clinton empathy for a hardon card.

Hell, it might work. It has more dignity than playing the race card, the age card, the experience card, the hope card, the POW card, or the supermom card.

Is this a great country, or what?

*stuff in ear plugs to mute the thunderous reply of "what" from the usual suspects . . . *

[Tricky]

One thing that annoys me about so many of the debates and also the campaigns is the point about bringing up the voting record without context. When you say "so and so voted against lunches for poor kids" then you ignore the fact that congressional bills don't vote for a single thing like school lunches. They cover many, maybe over a hundred things. The fact that some altruistic points are eliminated if a big budget buster bill is defeated is not relevant. Because both candidates were Senators, they both have the same kind of ammunition and in both cases they are shooting blanks while simultaneously being targets.

The fact is, most Americans don't understand how Congress works, so they buy the sound bytes about how so-and-so voted against such-and-such. The overall picture is hard for them to grasp, as well as the fact that it is a movie, not a snapshot.

Debates like this make me more cynical than anything. I probably shouldn't watch them.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Tricky

Debates like this make me more cynical than anything. I probably shouldn't watch them.

Fifty seven channels, and nothing on. That is why we have The Golf Channel: for when you want the TV on but don't really want to watch anything. Don't give the bastards the satisfaction by watching that rubbish they call "debates" during an election year.

DR

[HereticHulk]

Ron Paul won. Hands down.

[noch1Narr]

Obama came across as relaxed and poised, whereas McCain came across as angry,spiteful and downright nasty: "that one!" that shabby reference to Obama WILL get plenty of play on the next SNL! Also McCain referring to "Obama & his cronies"-- if THAT is not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what would be a better example.
I think the mentally-arthitic candidate looked & sounded less than presidential tonight, and Brokaw should have shouted at both of them when they went over their alloted time limit, especially McCain talking for over 2 minutes during one of his 1 minute time limit "rebuttals"....It weren't no draw, no Sirree!

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Since the GOP has already thrown him under the bus, why should he care? I say he bangs Eskimo Nell, to attract the middle of the road democrat vote, pulling the WJ Clinton empathy for a hardon card.

[Dymanic]

Originally Posted by not_so_new

I am an Obama supporter, I can't get over my own bias 100% and I freely admit that.

I also find that I simply cannot be objective here. That anyone could listen to what those two men said tonight and conclude that McCain had "won" in any sense of the word -- or that it was even close -- is completely incomprehensible to me. I suppose if he had been more successful in his usual attempts to misrepresent Obama's position I might have conceded that he had "won", but he doesn't do so well at that when Obama is there to straighten things out. I am also very reluctant to allow that anyone else could be any more objective about this than I can, unless that person was previously undecided on his or her choice of candidate. That anyone could still remain undecided at this point is something I find just as incomprehensible.

[Tricky]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Fifty seven channels, and nothing on. That is why we have The Golf Channel: for when you want the TV on but don't really want to watch anything. Don't give the bastards the satisfaction by watching that rubbish they call "debates" during an election year.

DR

I had no choice. I couldn't let Ms. Tricky think I was shallow.

[Cain]

I watched the first 15 minutes before I couldn't stand that **** any longer. Neither one of them answered the questions. In keeping with that style.

Our elections are ********** up.
Gerrymandering -- packing, stacking and cracking -- has resulted in many non-competitive seats for the House. Politicians choosing voters rather than voters choosing their legislators.
The Electoral College is an undemocratic institution.
The Senate is an even more undemocratic institution.
The Presidential election starts too damn early and goes on for too damn long.
The way campaigns are financed is ********.
We have a B.S. two party system.
The "special commission" and these debates are a joke.